Talk:Noonian Soong
Arik and Noonien There's speculation that Arik Soong made good his escape sometime after ENT, moved to the planet in the Briar Patch, and assumed a new identity when emerging again. Since there's no canon statement that he died or ever had children, this theory is not entirely unlikely (why else mention the Briar Patch?). It might be added to the article as an aside. :Actually, there's absolutely nothing linking the two canonically. As in zero, zip. I suggest removal of the definitive statement, replaced by a speculative assertation. --The Rev 23:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC) If I recall correctly there's an episode of him coming in the Uss enterprise and talking with Data, stating he is 100+ something years old...having a precise age coudl solve all of the speculations about him being the other soong guy. :::*''Given that Arik Soong was aware of the Briar Patch and felt that, should he escape custody, one of the two planets in the region would make an excellent hiding space, it is also conceivable that the two Soongs are the same person, having taken refuge on the Ba'ku planet and being kept alive and healthy for decades by the metaphasic radiation in its rings.'' ::More speculation to match the above — Morder 06:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC) PNA-incomplete Missing several references, including those made in , and . --Alan del Beccio 10:23, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) Removed Both Data and Lore appeared to be left-handed, or appeared to favor their left hands for certain tasks such as equipment useage, both however were seen making use of their right hands. It is unknown if this was programed to grant them another level of resemblance to their creator who also displayed a tendency to use his left hand for certain tasks -such as manipulating tools- as he also based their faces on his own. We don't state what is unknown.--31dot 02:06, November 15, 2009 (UTC) Spelling Is Doctor Soong's given name Noonien, with an e'', or ''Noonian, with an a''? I've seen a copy of the script online that contains the latter, not the former. : :I think you're on to something there: :"Noonian" - :On the other hand, "Noonien" :The Okudagram to the right also seems to say "Noonian". :– Cleanse ( talk | ) 03:40, May 15, 2010 (UTC) ::If there are different spellings out there, or were used, I'm wondering if we should go with the one that was used with the first appearance of the character, and note that other spellings were used.--31dot 08:16, May 15, 2010 (UTC) :::Well, script says "Noonian". and both just say "Soong" in the script so I would say Noonian is the proper spelling. The "e" probably comes from Khan where I remember someone saying Soong was supposedly named after or something... — Morder (talk) 08:35, May 15, 2010 (UTC) ::::"In-universe okudagram" beats background sources, I think. :) -- Cid Highwind 10:22, May 15, 2010 (UTC) ::In that case we should probably change it to the a, but note in the Background section the difference in spelling(with perhaps a redirect from the alternate spelling to here).--31dot 18:26, May 15, 2010 (UTC) :::Well, I was trying to point out that the background sources ''match the okudagram :) — Morder (talk) 19:05, May 15, 2010 (UTC) :Well, if you follow my links, you'll see that the background sources weren't consistent. ;-) Two of the early scripts consistently use "Noonien", but later scripts (including "Birthright" and "Inheritance") use "Noonian". This was kind of my point. But we have the Okudagram so "Noonian" is canon. :If someone with a bot could move this page it'd be great; there are many links to this page that'll need to be fixed.– Cleanse ( talk | ) 23:56, May 15, 2010 (UTC) :::why, in god's name, should i follow your links? :) I was just looking at the cast rather than the references to the character...but I still say that on screen trumps script in this case. — Morder (talk) 00:51, May 16, 2010 (UTC) :You offend me sir. Phaser duel at twenty paces! :Seriously though, I was just quibbling. I think you agree, I agree, everyone agrees that "Noonian" wins because it was on-screen. ;-)– Cleanse ( talk | ) 01:01, May 16, 2010 (UTC) :::Moved. — Morder (talk) 04:09, May 16, 2010 (UTC) Spelling, redux "Noonien" also appears on-screen in (TNG 7x10), when Data is searching passenger manifests to verify his mother's story. See screen capture to the right, which clearly shows "Soong, Noonien". -- Jersey emt 17:44, June 4, 2010 (UTC) :Based on this, I think there is a valid argument for the "e" spelling, since we also know the name comes from a real person whose name is spelled with the "e" as well. That said, it would suck to have to fix all the links again if this was moved back. - 11:26, June 9, 2010 (UTC) ::That's what bots are good for. -- sulfur 11:36, June 9, 2010 (UTC) :::Wow, this is getting complicated.... :) OK- here's what we seem to know: :::*Soong was named after a man GR knew who was named Noonien. :::*The scripts for and also use that spelling, though it did not appear in canon. :::*An Okudagram appears in canon in with the name spelled Noonian. :::*Scripts after that episode also use the spelling Noonian. :::*Another Okudagram appears in canon in Inheritance with the name spelled Noonien. :::*The Star Trek Encyclopedia and StarTrek.com used Noonien. :::Since the article can only be at one location, we have to prioritize. Since what appeared in canon gets first priority, we can dismiss the first two points as we have seen the name spelled in canon. Script spellings also aren't relevant if the spelling appeared in canon. We can also dismiss the Encyclopedia and StarTrek.com, as they are not canon. That leaves two contradictory Okudagrams which both clearly appeared in canon. :::I'm now a little torn- normally I would be of the opinion that we should use whatever spelling appeared in canon first as the title of the article itself. However, the second image has background information to back it up, namely the spelling of the man's name whom the character was named for. I'll need to see a little debate before I decide myself.--31dot 12:02, June 9, 2010 (UTC) :How many scripts actually use the "a" spelling? Based on what Morder said above, I got the impression that it was just "Brothers" and with the others using just Soong. As for what spelling MA should use, I would go with the "e", since it clearly was the original intent and is also the last, and therefore most recent, spelling in canon. - 12:30, June 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::Given that not everything something is named after is copied exactly I don't think that really enters into the equation. However, first on screen evidence says "a" last on screen evidence says "e" might as well stay at "a" with the redirect from "e" since either way the result is the same - two conflicting data creator names. — Morder (talk) 13:14, June 9, 2010 (UTC) ::And of course, the original, intended, spelling was "e", and perhaps the initial Okudagram with an "a" was a typo? Especially with the Encyclopedia and ST.com site using "e". -- sulfur 13:22, June 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::An important rule in the past has been that, in case of "conflicting canon", we shouldn't dismiss either fact as being wrong, but include both. This means the article should state, right at the beginning, something like "''Nooni*n Soong, in some official documents also listed as Nooni*n Soong, was ..." (basically, giving both spellings as valid alternatives). :::::This ''just leaves the question whether we should prefer the one or the other spelling - and to answer that question, we shouldn't use "first appearance" or "latest appearance" as a guideline, and we can't use something like "majority of appearances", because each spelling has appeared only once. This leaves production resources and producers' intent, which seems to be favoring "Noonien" rather clearly. -- Cid Highwind 15:10, June 9, 2010 (UTC) :::I think I'm leaning towards Cid's POV. I think the intent was Noonien, even if not consistent.--31dot 15:16, June 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::Really I don't think it matters what the name is for the target page since both are correct and either way it results in the same situation we currently have but reversed. But I will comment about the producer's intent as Roddenberry was alive for the "a" but not the "e"...otherwise move back if necessary :) — Morder (talk) 03:22, June 10, 2010 (UTC) :Since both are correct, internally we really don't need to move his back, but for consistency with other sites like Memory Beta and StarTrek.com, at the very least, as well as what Cid said, I still think we should. - 04:18, July 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I think Cid's argument is persuasive. The two Okudagrams are of equal weight and effectively cancel each other out, so we should go with what the majority of background sources say, which seems to be Noonien. —Josiah Rowe 12:59, July 9, 2010 (UTC) ¨Noonians pre androidic work. Im little confused so i am asking about this... Is the Noonian same noonian as on ST Enterprice season 4 ep 4-6, Noonian, who had dealings with the "augments"? That means he was a scientist behind study and storage of biomodified superhumans, after the eugenetics war. Are we speaking the same noonian? At the end of the ep 6, he mentions maybe working with the androids... with the artificial life. I can add a image of him from earlier episodes while not being cuffed, but i think this information, ih he is he who i think he is, that he worked with genetically enhanced humans prior to androidic research. --JHawx 18:50, October 16, 2010 (UTC) :Different guy. Related, but different guy. 200+ years between them. -- sulfur 19:50, October 16, 2010 (UTC) ::Just to be clear: the Enterprise character is Arik Soong, not Noonian. Noonian is intended to be his descendant, a couple of centuries later. —Josiah Rowe 18:43, October 17, 2010 (UTC)